MOHAN MALA -A rosary of Gandhiji's
Mohandas was Gandhiji's first name.That is how the word
Mohan is taken.
Mala means a garland or a rosary used for repeating a
mantra or the name of God.
Here,we bring you powerful and practical messages given
by Mahatma Gandhiji in the course of his life. For each day of the year,
there is one message.At the end of each, the source (book) from which
it is taken and then the date (wherever available) on which Gandhiji gave
the message are mentioned.
Read them, follow them and share them with your family
Like Gandhiji, all his words are True and Eternal......
Man's estate is one of probation. During that period he is played upon by evil forces as well as good. He is ever prey to temptations. He has to prove his manliness by resisting and fighting temptations.
Man's nature is not essentially evil. Brute nature has been known to yield to the influence of love, You must never despair of human nature.
Instead of using the body as a temple of God we use it as a vehicle for indulgences and are not ashamed to run to medical men for help in our effort to increase them and abuse the earthly tabernacle.
We want healers of souls rather than of bodies. The multiplicity of hospitals and medical men is no sign of true civilization. The less we and others pamper our bodies the better for us and the world.
One should eat not in order to please the palate, but just to keep body going. When each organ of sense subserves the body and through the body the soul, its special relish disappears and then alone does it begin to function in the way nature intended it to do. Any number of experiments is too small and no sacrifice too great for attaining this symphony with nature.
The golden rule . . . is resolutely to refuse to have what millions cannot. This ability to refuse will not descend upon us all of a sudden. The first thing is to cultivate the mental attitude that we will not have possession or facilities denied to millions, and the next immediate thing is to rearrange our lives as fast as possible in accordance with that mentality.
In India we have got three millions of people who have to be satisfied with one meal a day, and that meal consisting of a chapati containing no fat in it and a pinch of salt. You and I have no right to anything that we really have until these three millions are clothed and fed better. You and I, who ought to know better, must adjust our wants, and even undergo voluntary starvation inorder that they may be nursed, fed and clothed.
I am no socialist and I do not want to dispossess those who have got possessions;but I do say that personally those of us who want to see light out of darkness have to follow this rule. I do not want to dispossess anybody. I should then be departing from the rule of Ahinsa. If somebody else possesses more than I do, let him. But so far as my own life has to be regulated, I dare not possess anything that I do not want.
I venture to suggest that it is the fundamental law of Nature, without exception, that Nature produces enough for our wants from day to day, and if only everybody took enough for himself and nothing more, there would be no pauperism in this world, there would be no man dying of starvation in this world.
I suggest we are thieves in a way. If I take anything that I do not need for my own immediate use and keep it, I thieve it from somebody else.
We should be ashamed of resting, or having a square meal so long as there is one able-bodied man or woman without work or food.
Our civilization, our culture, our Swaraj depend not upon multiplying our wants-- self-indulgence, but upon restricting our wants - self-denial.
As it is, the rich are discontented no less than the poor. The poor man would become a millionaire and the millionaire a multimillionaire, The poor are often not satisfied when they get just enough to fill their stomachs; but they are clearly entitled to it and society should make it a point to see that they get it.
The rich have a superfluous store of things which they do not need and which are, therefore, neglected and wasted; while millions starve and are frozen to death for want of them. If each retained possession only of what he needed, none would be in want and all would live in contentment.
We are either ignorant or negligent of the Divine Law in virtue of which man has been given only big daily bread and no more, with the result that there arise inequalities with all the misery attendant upon them.
A seeker after Truth, a follower of the Law of Love, cannot hold anything against tomorrow. God never provides for the morrow. He never creates more than what is strictly needed from day to day. If, therefore, we repose faith in His Providence, we should rest assured that He will give us every day our daily bread, supplying enough that we require.
The golden rule of conduct is mutual toleration, seeing that we will never all think alike and we shall always see Truth in fragment and from different angles of vision.
Not killing competition, but life-giving co-operation, is the law of the human being. Ignoring the emotion is to forget that man has feelings. Not the good of the few, not even good of the many, but it is the good of all that we are made to promote, if we are 'made in His own image'.
We must widen the circle of our love till it embraces the whole village; the village in its turn must take into its fold the district, the district the province, and so on till the scope of our love becomes one with the world.
The forms are many, but the informing spirit is one. How can there be room for distinctions of high and low where there is this all-embracing fundamental unity under?lying the outward diversity? For that is a fact meeting you at every step in daily life. The final goal of all religions is to realize this essential oneness.
If there is a fundamental distinction between man and beast, it is the former's progressive recognition of the law and its application in practice to his own personal life. All the saints of the world, ancient and modern, were each according to his light and capacity a living illustration of that supreme Law of our Being.
If love was not the law of life, life would not have persisted in the midst of death. Life is a perpetual triumph over the grave.
I have found that life persists in the midst of destruction and therefore there must be a higher law than that of destruction. Only under that law would a well-ordered society be intelligible and life worth living.
We notice it between father and son - between brother and sister, friend and friend, But we have to learn to use that force among all that lives, and in the use of it consists our knowledge of God. Where there is love, there is life; hatred leads to destruction.
Scientists tell us that without the presence of the cohesive force amongst the atoms that comprise this globe of ours, it would crumble to pieces and we would cease to exist; and even as there is cohesive force in blind matter, so must there be in all things animate and the name for that cohesive force among animate beings is Love.
To believe that the sum total of the energy of mankind is not to bring us down but to lift us up, and that is the result of the ineffable, if unconscious, working of the law of love. The fact that mankind persists shows that the cohesive force is greater than the disruptive force, centripetal force greater than centrifugal.
Love never claims, it ever gives. Love ever suffers, never resents, never revenges itself.
Where Love is, there God is also.